Some updates ...

Sorry about the lack of posts lately.

It isn't that I've run out of ideas (although some might say that would be a good thing), I've just been busy on a number of other fronts.

1. Making some good progress on the "Green Accelerator" concept.

2. Even more promising developments on the whole One Long Island project and how it relates to "Meta- Planning" on Long Island.

3. My music CD project nearing completion. Not coming out too bad as far as I can tell from early reaction. Although people may just be acting politely so as not to crush my enthusiasm.

A different perspective

Interesting and potentially helpful show here.

Always nice to see different perspectives. It helps shake the cobwebs off the old grey matter.

Prelude 3a

Just something else I've been working on here ...

http://longislandideafactory.podomatic.com/entry/2008-05-16T15_30_56-07_00

Fluid versus Static Intelligence

"An individual's level of fluid intelligence can be determined based on the degree to which he or she is able to let go of previously held conceptions on encountering reliable information or experiences which show these conceptions to be mistaken or overly simplistic.

At the other end of the spectrum from fluid intelligence is static intelligence.

When those with a high degree of static intelligence encounter information which seriously questions the established paradigm, they attempt to discredit the new information using laws and principles previously agreed upon under the old paradigm. If they fail at this, the new information is then deemed not worthy of study and discarded. At worst, the new evidence is actively attacked as being irrational or unscientific, even though it may be easily verified."

Interesting reading ...

"At a recent Wharton roundtable discussion on leadership and innovation, Wharton management professor Michael Useem, event moderator, initiated discussion by posing a general question: How are leadership and innovation linked? "How exactly do we put those two together? How do we lead in a way that generates innovation?" he asked, describing the synergy as "a kind of high-octane fuel we ought to get as much of as we can."

Read the entire article here (http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=1569)

Some light reading for a Sunday ...

An Extended Problem Solving Theory
We are now ready to present an extended theory of hu-
man problem solving that moves beyond the abstract
framework provided by the standard version. This forms
a key part of Icarus, an account of the human cogni-
tive architecture. We will present only those aspects
of Icarus relevant to problem solving, but we have pre-
sented more complete descriptions elsewhere (Choi et al.,
2004). We will use the phenomena listed above to orga-
nize our points.

(click to read entire article)

Long Island Change Management:Part One

Changing the way we "do business on" and "think" about Long Island is a long term project.

Some good preliminary ideas are here, here, here (where the above image is from) and here.

As we've indicated previously, the concept behind Long Island 3.0 (The One Long Island Project) is to create something that transcends current limitations and personal or organizational ambitions and instead, creates a long term and sustainable environment for the flexibility and dynamism Long Island will require to navigate the future.

"Change. Ours is an era of massive change, sometimes liberating, other times traumatic. Organisations find themselves buffeted by external forces: technological, market, political and cultural. They are challenged to become ever more efficient, effective, productive and competitive. How can they be active masters of change rather than reactive servants? How can change in organisations be driven by their people rather than the organisation in the abstract, or its leaders having to drag them along? Organisations will fail if they are not capable of learning, in a collective sense, as well as the individuals who spend their days at work there. They will fail if they do not regard themselves as places of continuous personal and corporate reinvention, of individual and institutional transformation. The organisation and every person within it needs to envision themselves, not as a change object, but as an agent of change."

Thinking About Long Island

We join spokes together in a wheel,
but it is the center hole
that makes the wagon move.

We shape clay into a pot,
but it is the emptiness inside
that holds whatever we want.

We hammer wood for a house,
but it is the inner space
that makes it livable.

We work with being,
but non-being is what we use.

What is Long Island? 

A geographic region to be sure.  A series of interconnecting communities or a series of random communities? A place to come from or a destination? 

There are many ways to view Long Island.

But how about Long Island as an idea? Not as a means to an end but an end in and of itself?

We need to think of Long Island comprehensively rather than as a series of issues to be addressed or problems to be solved.  We must think of how one issue influences all relevant issues. 

For example, how can we build affordable housing if we don't know how it affects the traffic, sewage disposal, energy needs, school enrollment among some items and what type of housing and where and how much and for how long  ...

Some might view those types of question as being obstructionist, that we are simply against building. This is not the case. We must have a comprehensive, long term approach to Long Island and the influence our decisions will  have on successive generation. 

In short, we need to use our intelligence and resources to think about and plan for what Long Island is and what it reasonably may become. Not just what we think it should be, but as a practical matter, what are our limitations and how do we overcome those limitations. How do we achieve balance.

We can never know how to achieve a balanced existence on Long Island unless we view Long Island as one entity, as a sort of "dynamic idea accelerator" which may have many moving parts (diversity creates a constant stream of new ideas), yet operates in a cooperative and positive manner.  We should not continue to rely on the "great man (person) theory" to find a solution to our problems. No one individual has all the answers.

We must also encourage our Long Island schools and universities to train our young people in the great possibilities of what Long Island can become. Not in an isolationist sort of way, but in a way that gets them thinking about how all the parts work on Long Island and how they can make them work in a better way. Because if they can do it in their own back yard, they can do it anywhere in the world.

The Long Island Congress and Long Island 3.0 attempt to offer some initial structure to this concept, to "create a pot" or "build a house"as it were to fill with whatever our imagination and abilities can conjure up and to create a new Long Island we can all be proud of. 

It won't be perfect and it is an ongoing process. But thinking about Long Island is a good first step and continued thinking will keep Long Island alive and well as a region, an idea or both.

Long Island Congress: Breaking the Cycle of Stagnation

What will it take to break the "cycle of stagnation" that affects so much of what we do here on Long Island?

It is probably no secret by now that communication and accurate information play a large role in any type of significant, positive change.

Those of us who have been observing communities, government and organizations here on Long Island (I'm into my 25th year of observation, a mere child compared to some!) are continually struck by the "themes" which continue to appear time and time again with different players playing the same tune. Whether its taxes or development or energy or any of a thousand issues, we never seem to make the progress we feel we should, or can. This feeling is obviously not unique to Long Island and Long Islanders (many of the themes in this blog are transferable to other regions), but it is what we are interested in and will continue to focus on.

It is not that our leaders (from whatever discipline), are "bad people," corrupt or are misleading us or that the general populous of Long Island is unwilling to change or that we don't have sufficient resources and brainpower to make the changes. It is just that we are not organized properly and have not empowered ourselves with the right tools to get the job done.

There are no short term, magical solutions to addressing Long Island's issues. For example, comparing Long Island to other regions to find solutions may be part of an answer, but it will never be the entire answer. Why? Because each region, including Long Island has a uniqueness, sometimes easily quantifiable, sometimes not that requires us to use a higher level of analysis (which is why we need diversity of opinion).

Additionally, making pronouncements that changing a part of the problem is in fact the answer to all our problems is equally destructive ("The greatest enemy of progress is not stagnation, but false progress." Sydney J. Harris). We all have a desire to have people say good things about us and obviously those in power have a need to maintain the staus quo to some level (even while appearing that they wish to change it!). Why? Ego, power, fear, money, ambition ... you name it. This hasn't changed since the beginning of human existence. This does not make them bad people. It makes them, and us, human.

"How to be innovative is a burning question for top management in the world today. Most organizations are looking for ways to improve their ability to create ideas and to develop the best environment for idea creation. More organizations are turning to the practice of knowledge management for sharing experiences and expertise, integrating knowledge, and generating new knowledge. What organizations need is a better understanding of how knowledge management is related to the innovation process and how it can be used to help foster innovation within organizations."

So how do we change?

First we have to accept that we can and must do things better. Here there is probably universal agreement.

Second we have to identify what the primary and secondary issues are. Here we can probably get a substantial majority to agree.

Third we have to design an approach to address the issues. Here we have a problem.

We generally don't speak the same organizational language and probably can't even agree on a way to get started. Sure we convene a "task force" from time to time on related subject matter that issues a report that sits on a shelf somewhere and we make a stab at bring folks with a "common" issue together for a common purpose, but it's kind of like being invited to a dance with no music. Everyone looks at each other, says nice things (generally) and goes home without ever truly interacting. There's no rhythm, no dynamism and therefore ultimately no purpose, in a real sense, to the dance.

So how do we begin to change this "lack of rhythm" on Long Island?

By first agreeing on some way to communicate in a dynamic way. Long Island 3.0 can give us the tools. Long Island Congress can give us a non-confrontational organizational structure.

Real answers based on accurate information presented in a dynamic format.

It's up to us if we want to change. There is really nothing else preventing it.

"But in some ways it'€™s less the business model that they chose, but the commitment to being transformational that I found most intriguing. It takes guts to revisit every assumption, premise, brainstorm, strategy and relationship on a regular basis. It's uncomfortable not to have familiar benchmarks; reinventing the wheel is harder than it sounds on a whiteboard. Reversion to the mean happens for a very simple reason: Innovation is terrifying when done right."

Dynamic Interaction/Types of Intelligence:Part One

I've spoken before about the need to create a "dynamic" flow of information, analysis and public policy creation as opposed to the "static" method most organizations now employ. I've also expressed the opinion that we need to broaden the number of individuals involved in the process and allow for a wide range of ability and talent (multi-disciplinary) in determining public policy for Long Island.

This is just one of many theories on types of intelligence, but I think it simplifies (for the time being) the concept in a way that is immediately understandable.